Hi, maybe this is OT, anyway... Some background, motivation: till now my users are using mozilla for browsing and emailing. Mozilla has reached his end of life: [suse:] "If you want to get new versions and features you should switch to SeaMonkey which is also available in that repository." Ok, lets switch to seamonkey! (It is easier to handle with NX: one applikation for browsing and emailing!) I installed the newest 10.0-x86_64 version of seamonkey from the suse project pages at 10.1-RC3-x86_64. The seamonkey ist working. The problem are the plugins!!! Until now I'm not able to get the java plugin working. Any ideas? Shouldn't seamonkey be supported in 10.1 and x86_64? Rupert
Rupert Kolb wrote: [...]
Mozilla has reached his end of life: [suse:] "If you want to get new versions and features you should switch to SeaMonkey which is also available in that repository."
[...]
I installed the newest 10.0-x86_64 version of seamonkey from the suse project pages at 10.1-RC3-x86_64. The seamonkey ist working. The problem are the plugins!!!
Until now I'm not able to get the java plugin working.
Any ideas? Shouldn't seamonkey be supported in 10.1 and x86_64?
(1) I didn't find seamonkey in any of the 10.1 prereleases. ... but it should be there! (2) Both, the 10.0-i386 and 10.0-x86_64 version, are working in the 10.1-RC3-x86_64 (3) But the plugins (Java(TM) Plug-in 1.4.2_11-b06, Shockwave Flash 7.0 r63,Adobe Reader 7.0) are only working in the 10.1-RC3-i386 version Rupert
On 2006-05-04 at 16:17:22 +0200, Rupert Kolb wrote (shortened):
(1) I didn't find seamonkey in any of the 10.1 prereleases. ... but it should be there!
It's only on the DVD and it wasn't there from the beginning.
(2) Both, the 10.0-i386 and 10.0-x86_64 version, are working in the 10.1-RC3-x86_64 (3) But the plugins (Java(TM) Plug-in 1.4.2_11-b06, Shockwave Flash 7.0 r63,Adobe Reader 7.0) are only working in the 10.1-RC3-i386 version
Correct. And this is expected since we don't have a x86-64 Java/Flash/Adobe Reader plugin. Wolfgang -- SUSE LINUX GmbH -o) Tel: +49-(0)911-740 53 0 Maxfeldstr. 5 /\\ Fax: +49-(0)911-740 53 679 90409 Nuernberg, Germany _\_v
On 4 May 2006 at 16:23, Wolfgang Rosenauer wrote:
On 2006-05-04 at 16:17:22 +0200, Rupert Kolb wrote (shortened):
(1) I didn't find seamonkey in any of the 10.1 prereleases. ... but it should be there!
It's only on the DVD and it wasn't there from the beginning.
(2) Both, the 10.0-i386 and 10.0-x86_64 version, are working in the 10.1-RC3-x86_64 (3) But the plugins (Java(TM) Plug-in 1.4.2_11-b06, Shockwave Flash 7.0 r63,Adobe Reader 7.0) are only working in the 10.1-RC3-i386 version
Correct. And this is expected since we don't have a x86-64 Java/Flash/Adobe Reader plugin.
Wouldn't it be preferrable to ship/install a 32bit executable of the browser for archs that support running 32 and 64 bit binaries? I mean: Who needs 64 bit in a browser? Or some intermediate 64-bit stub that does an exec to a 32 bit program (Actually I don't know whow the plugin mechanism works) Regards, Ulrich
On Friday 05 May 2006 09:41, Ulrich Windl wrote:
Wouldn't it be preferrable to ship/install a 32bit executable of the browser for archs that support running 32 and 64 bit binaries? I mean: Who needs 64 bit in a browser? Or some intermediate 64-bit stub that does an exec to a 32 bit program (Actually I don't know whow the plugin mechanism works)
This is possible with Konqueror only, and yes Konqueror 64 bit can use the 32bit plugins, like flash if you use the 32bit nspluginviewer. AFAIK SUSE has a setup where you can simply install the 32bit nsplugin aside of 64bit Konqueror with no problems. With Firefox, this is not possible. You have to install the 32bit version of the browser, but you can do it, can't you. ;-) Andras -- Quanta Plus developer - http://quanta.kdewebdev.org K Desktop Environment - http://www.kde.org
On 2006-05-05 at 08:41:15 +0200, Ulrich Windl wrote (shortened):
Correct. And this is expected since we don't have a x86-64 Java/Flash/Adobe Reader plugin.
Wouldn't it be preferrable to ship/install a 32bit executable of the browser for archs that support running 32 and 64 bit binaries? I mean: Who needs 64 bit in a browser? Or some intermediate 64-bit stub that does an exec to a 32 bit program (Actually I don't know whow the plugin mechanism works)
The plugin mechanism doesn't allow such a workaround at the moment unfortunately. The 32bit workaround is already done for Firefox but wasn't possible easily in the past for mozilla since many applications used libraries from the mozilla installation. It would have been possible with SeaMonkey though since it isn't an integral part anymore for other applications. If you think that's useful (I agree at the moment) to ship SeaMonkey in 32bit version on x86-64 please file a bugreport as enhancement. (But the three examples from above should really be solved from their vendors!) Wolfgang -- SUSE LINUX GmbH -o) Tel: +49-(0)911-740 53 0 Maxfeldstr. 5 /\\ Fax: +49-(0)911-740 53 679 90409 Nuernberg, Germany _\_v
Wolfgang Rosenauer wrote:
On 2006-05-05 at 08:41:15 +0200, Ulrich Windl wrote (shortened):
Correct. And this is expected since we don't have a x86-64 Java/Flash/Adobe Reader plugin. Wouldn't it be preferrable to ship/install a 32bit executable of the browser for archs that support running 32 and 64 bit binaries? I mean: Who needs 64 bit in a browser? Or some intermediate 64-bit stub that does an exec to a 32 bit program (Actually I don't know whow the plugin mechanism works)
Note that from Sun JDK/JRE 1.5.0 on, there are real 64bit builds. I assume the plugin in that JRE is 64bit as well. $ rpm -q java-1_5_0-sun --qf "%{ARCH}\n" x86_64 Any reason there isn't any java-1_5_0-sun-plugin package ? That way we could have a 64bit Java plugin for 64bit firefox ;) (ok, still doesn't help for Flash, which is probably a much higher priority than the Java plugin)
The plugin mechanism doesn't allow such a workaround at the moment unfortunately.
The 32bit workaround is already done for Firefox but wasn't possible easily in the past for mozilla since many applications used libraries from the mozilla installation.
It would have been possible with SeaMonkey though since it isn't an integral part anymore for other applications.
If you think that's useful (I agree at the moment) to ship SeaMonkey in 32bit version on x86-64 please file a bugreport as enhancement. (But the three examples from above should really be solved from their vendors!)
What about packages that require gtkmozembed ? (liferea [1] being one
example)
[1] feedreader: http://liferea.sourceforge.net/
http://linux01.gwdg.de/~pbleser/rpm-navigation.php?cat=Network/liferea/
Since mozilla has been withdrawn from 10.1 and "replaced" by
seamonkey, there is no gtkmozembed available any more.
From what I've seen, Seamonkey doesn't provide a 1:1 compatible form
of gtkmozembed - at least I haven't been able to build liferea with it.
The MozillaFirefox packages don't ship a -devel, so I cannot use those
to build gecko support in liferea (although liferea supports doing so).
What about shipping a MozillaFirefox-devel and a MozillaFirefox with
gtkmozembed ?
Note that "too much work" would be a valid reason not to do it, I
mean, I just throw that question out in the wild, but I'm very much
aware that MozillaFirefox & friends are very tedious pieces of
software to package.
I'm just naively assuming that the headers, .so symlinks and pkgconfig
files are being installed anyway and just being discarded by the spec
file at the moment, which means it would not be too much work to
include them in a -devel subpackage.
Remember, I said "naively" ;)
cheers
--
-o) Pascal Bleser http://linux01.gwdg.de/~pbleser/
/\\
On Fri, May 05, 2006 at 12:56:12PM +0200, Pascal Bleser wrote:
Any reason there isn't any java-1_5_0-sun-plugin package ?
Sun does not provide a plugin for amd64 thus there is nothing to package available. Robert -- Robert Schiele Tel.: +49-621-181-2214 Dipl.-Wirtsch.informatiker mailto:rschiele@uni-mannheim.de "Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur."
Hi, On 2006-05-05 at 12:56:12 +0200, Pascal Bleser wrote (shortened):
If you think that's useful (I agree at the moment) to ship SeaMonkey in 32bit version on x86-64 please file a bugreport as enhancement. (But the three examples from above should really be solved from their vendors!)
What about packages that require gtkmozembed ? (liferea [1] being one example)
gtkmozembed is in mozilla-xulrunner nowadays. The devel package is gecko-sdk which is only available online because of size constraints.
[1] feedreader: http://liferea.sourceforge.net/ http://linux01.gwdg.de/~pbleser/rpm-navigation.php?cat=Network/liferea/
Since mozilla has been withdrawn from 10.1 and "replaced" by seamonkey, there is no gtkmozembed available any more. From what I've seen, Seamonkey doesn't provide a 1:1 compatible form of gtkmozembed - at least I haven't been able to build liferea with it.
The MozillaFirefox packages don't ship a -devel, so I cannot use those to build gecko support in liferea (although liferea supports doing so).
What about shipping a MozillaFirefox-devel and a MozillaFirefox with gtkmozembed ?
I want to keep Firefox a leaf package without such dependencies.
Note that "too much work" would be a valid reason not to do it, I mean, I just throw that question out in the wild, but I'm very much aware that MozillaFirefox & friends are very tedious pieces of software to package.
I'm just naively assuming that the headers, .so symlinks and pkgconfig files are being installed anyway and just being discarded by the spec file at the moment, which means it would not be too much work to include them in a -devel subpackage.
Wolfgang -- SUSE LINUX GmbH -o) Tel: +49-(0)911-740 53 0 Maxfeldstr. 5 /\\ Fax: +49-(0)911-740 53 679 90409 Nuernberg, Germany _\_v
participants (6)
-
Andras Mantia -
Pascal Bleser -
Robert Schiele -
Rupert Kolb -
Ulrich Windl -
Wolfgang Rosenauer